Become a Fan

October 22, 2018

We have had some correspondence expressing dismay of the growth of atheism, and even militant atheism. It is evident that people are not only departing from religion, but that among some of them, there is a visceral hatred of religion.

An acquaintance in Ireland wrote to me that he had voted "yes" on both of the recent controversial referenda in that country, although he did not completely agree with either one. He said, “I did not so much vote for the two referendums as I did vote against the Catholic Church.”

It may be that that is why the two referenda carried. Not only is the memory of the Magdalene Sisters still very much alive, but an inordinate number of the men in Ireland were sexually abused by priests when they were children. Also, when it came to light that there is a slush fund of the mistresses and children of higher-ranking clergy, all of that added to a cynicism about Christianity in general, although it only involved one denomination.

The response from some of the hierarchy when these two referenda passed was that they had failed in the task of educating the people in the faith. It is precisely the wrong response. The response should have been, “How have our actions and attitudes destroyed the faith of so many people?”

And in fact, many of the people who voted yes on these two referenda are deeply believing Catholic Christians. Rather than lamenting the rise of atheism around the world, and blaming demons or science or something else, it would be more reasonable for every religious body to examine itself in a very harsh light and ask what it has done to drive people away from Faith.

In North America, a right-wing fundamentalist approach to Christianity has had a great deal to do with the advancement of modern atheism. Telling people that they must believe something which they know of a certainty is not true in order to be Christian is certainly not going to solve anything! Trying to turn back the tide of atheism through advocating things that are demonstrably untrue, and through threats of wrath and other types of fear, is certainly not going to solve the problem! For religious bodies to demonstrate an amorality, for the sake of a political agenda is no way to turn back the tide of atheism; it is a recipe for turning it into a tidal wave!

It is very difficult for any ideological system to deeply analyse itself and find its own error, its own drift away from its original raison d’être, and turn itself back toward its original mandate. The hypocrisy, bigotry, amorality and even immorality of many of our religious bodies is certainly a serious problem.

With blatant falsehoods such as creationism--especially when it tries to pass itself off as a science and when religious bodies try to force it into the school system--or when some religious bodies seek to undermine democracy and accept immorality in the name of this agenda, then one can hardly wonder about why there is a growth in atheism, and why there is a visceral hatred of Christianity growing, not only in America, and elsewhere.

But even this is not the whole problem. When a dominant Christian body essentially advocates social injustice and denounces efforts at alleviating the suffering of poverty and instead, lobbies for the enrichment of the already extremely wealthy at the expense of the poor, this is a total abandonment of Christianity. It turns its back on Christ Himself and marks the devolution away from Christianity into a new religion of Christianism. This ideological “-ism” tied to a political and financial system has replaced the true worship of Christ and rendered Christ only a “frontman” for a religio/political cult.

What is necessary, but unlikely, is for every religious body to undergo a deep and unremitting examination of itself to see if it has any real relationship with its Founder, or whether it has just become a political movement with religious trappings and an ideological political agenda.

August 03, 2018

"Biblical scholars are well aware of the fact that Jesus celebrated the Passover and that his celebration of this Mosaic festival must shape our understanding of the Lord’s Supper. But while these scholars stress the salvific significance of Passover, they virtually ignore its important eschatological background."—Noel Rabinowitz

While Orthodox Christian theology is keenly aware of this connection, it is forgotten more and more by priests, bishops and laity alike. The liturgy is clearly eschatological.

Its connection with “Passover – Pascha” is clear in our theology, and yet the Greek church in particular seems dedicated to abolishing the concept of “Pascha” (replacing even the name with “Easter” in place of Pascha – the Passover of Christ) and paying only elitist theological attention to the eschatological reality of the liturgy.

The liturgy directly connects the creation narrative with the idea of the second coming of Christ and Transfiguration. The liturgy is the wedding banquet of the heavenly bridegroom with the earthly bride. The altar is a type of paradise in which the tree of life is to be found.

This is why we should not succumb to the convenience of are trying to Holy Pascha as “Easter”. Pascha is a dogmatic expression which unveils the meaning of Christ’s sacrifice and the very life of the church. Death has “passed over – Pascha” us through Jesus Christ, just as through Moses, death passed over the Hebrews in Egypt.

Salvation consists in this: Christ ransomed us from the fear of death, and thus redeemed us from the power of Satan. Since He was our “Paschal Lamb,” He was not a substitutionary sacrifice, but something much higher.

It really is important to maintain the concept of Pascha, and to grasp that the Divine liturgy presents us with the fruit of the tree of life that grew in paradise – a prophecy about the cross, and the Revelation that Christ himself is the fruit of the tree of life, just as the cross is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

The liturgy is a heavenly banquet. Notice that not once in the liturgy do we mention any concept of “Hell”, damnation or punishment, but only resurrection, life, a victory over death, hope and expectation of paradise.

This is why I hold that it is a sin to close the doors of the altar during the liturgy, except perhaps for the priest’s communion. For Christ has risen from the dead, opening the gates of Paradise, which shall never be closed again. The altar is a visible Revelation of paradise. We are led out of bondage to the spiritual Pharaoh, through the Red Sea of baptism into the glorious freedom of God’s children. We are children of the promise, not of the law.

May 03, 2018

The life and actions, and the way Christ treated the outcast and "sinner" is the greater part of the Gospel.

It seems that far too many people see a set of laws and rules in the Gospel, and do not see the light and life in which often, social conventions and rules are simply overturned. Not only is the Parable of the Prodigal at the heart of the Gospel, but something too often overlooked: Under the law, a leper is not only nb outcast who cannot enter the temple precinct, but it is forbidden even to touch a leper.

Christ, however, heals the leper precisely by touching him. Touching the leper is as much a part of the Gospel and any word recorded in it. Indeed, the Gospel of our salvation consists far more in what Christ did than in what He said. The healing of the fallen human nature by taking it upon Himself; calling us out of our alienation by His Incarnation and fellowship with us, delivering us from the bondage to the fear of death; embracing sinners, touching lepers, conversing with a Samaritan woman and making here an Apostle; healing the child of a Canaanite "sinner."

And why did Christ make a habit of eating and drinking with sinners and publicans except to demonstrate to them that He does not leave them in their alienation, but rather, God has come down to them, to find these lost sheep and heal their alienation. Since they could not make it back to God on their own, He comes and takes them by their spiritual hands and leads them out of their alienation: all this is the Gospel. And our salvation appears to rest on our understanding that Matthew 25 is a keystone in that Gospel by demonstrating to us by what means we may know that we have assimilated His Gospel and are ourselves no longer in alienation from God.

November 22, 2017

A video conversation with Ron Dart and Lazar Puhalo (from July 11, 2011) and reflections by Ron Dart today.

Anglicans and Orthodox: An Ancient Tale

Archbishop Lazar and Ron Dart in Conversation

The Bible tends to end the Christian journey with the spread of Christianity in the Mediterranean and an end of times scenario in Revelation. Needless to say Christianity spread eastward and northward to India, Eastern Europe and Russia. This is not recorded in the Bible.

Christianity also spread north and northwest to what was then called Albion and a heartland of the Celts. Neither is this recorded in the Bible.

The form Christianity took eastward and to the north became, for the most part, Orthodoxy. The form Christianity took in Albion became a form of Celtic Christianity that, in time, became the church of the English (Anglicane Ecclesiae). The Anglican and Orthodox traditions, although emerging and maturing in different parts of the world, have much affinity.

There is, in the earliest records of the church, traffic between the growing Occidental form of Christianity and the Oriental form of Christianity. The history between these two historic forms of classical Christianity, at its best, is irenical and deeply rooted in the wisdom and contemplative theology of the Patristic Fathers and Mothers of the historic Church, major Creeds and Councils. There is, in short, no need for these classical Christian heritages to butt horns and indulge in the one up man ship game and melodrama that often dominates in some quarters. We have far greater challenges before us in the 21st century then persisting in historic internal clashes and fragmentation. The close relationship between leading Anglican contemplative theologians of the 20th and 21st centuries such as Evelyn Underhill, Donald Allchin and Rowan Williams and such Orthodox theologians as Anthony Bloom, Timothy Ware and Andrew Louth does need to be duly noted. The formation of The Society of St. Alban and St. Sergius reflects and embodies such an affinity between Anglicanism and Orthodoxy.

I mention the above for the simple reason that Archbishop Lazar (obviously Orthodox) and I (Anglican) have had a fond and gracious working relationship for many a decade at a variety of significant levels. We founded the Canadian branch of St. Alban and Sergius and our many video collaborations on the Philokalia, Desert Tradition, High Tory Canadian politics, ecology and literature spanned a wide spectrum. I thought it apt and fitting, given the fact that Archbishop Lazar has suffered a stroke (hopefully, the mending will ever improve) that an earlier conversation between he and I on Orthodoxy and Anglicanism be reposted--comments welcome.

The joyful photo of Archbishop Lazar and I, glass tilted high in celebration, is its own sacred text and icon of sorts.

September 16, 2017

 “Then the LORD spoke his word to Zechariah. He said, ‘This is what the LORD of Armies says: Administer real justice, and be compassionate and kind to each other. Don't oppress widows, orphans, foreigners, and poor people. And don't even think of doing evil to each other.” (Zechariah 7:8-10) 

“Here is my servant whom I have chosen, the one I love, in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will proclaim justice to the nations. He will not quarrel or cry out; no one will hear his voice in the streets. A bruised reed he will not break, and a smoldering wick he will not snuff out, till he leads justice to victory.” (Matthew 12:18-20 – NIV)

Retributive justice is no justice at all. It is merely revenge.

No concept of retributive justice can possibly be compatible with forgiveness. Where there is punishment, there is no forgiveness. Where there is forgiveness, there can be no punishment.

Justice, in order to be just, must always take into account every mitigation and extenuation: “He remembers that we are but dust,” the Psalmist says.

Moreover, “justice” includes giving rewards and restoring things to rightful owners. Justice with mercy includes giving what a person actually needs rather than only what they merit. There is a reason why Paul, referring to “sin,” uses the concept την αμαρτία, rather than την ενοχή, την ανομία, or το σπάσιμο του νόμου. Sin means to miss the mark, fall short of the goal, and the goal is unity with God. Alienation, not “breaking laws,” is our real problem. Even a virtue can be a sin (`αμαρτία) if it causes an alienation between us and God. Not only the idea of retributive justice, but the idea of redemption through “substitutionary sacrfice” negates every concept of forgiveness. Nevertheless, salvation comes through forgiveness.

June 29, 2017

Truth is a river in which the water is constantly renewed. Every new discovery, every new level of understanding, every unfolding of knowledge adds new water, deepens the channel, and broadens the perspective as the old water flows away and new water flows in. The supreme foolishness is to think that we possess any absolute or final truth. Each epoch proves such an idea wanting. Ironically, "truth" consists primarily in searching for it and understanding that when you find it, it will change with the next step in unfolding knowledge. The knowledge and understanding of reality proceeds in the same manner. We engage models of reality that to be truthful, must be replaced with new models of reality when the former ones are found to be only transitions from one level of knowledge to another. Those who think they have concrete and absolute truth or reality are truly deluded and frozen in a time that recedes into the past and becomes more and more disconnected, more and more episodes in cognitive dissonance, and those who hold such faded models and wilted truths generally only become more bitter and dogmatic the further they are left in the shadow of the past and the more their minds become irrelevant. Absolute truth exists only in the Heavenly Kingdom, and we frail and fallen humans know of that only in shadows and intimations. We cannot know it in fact until we experience it in the age to come.

(Vladika Lazar Puhalo, from "SAILING IN THE WINTER SUN: The Journal of an Old Man")

Fr. John Romanides said, "We know where grace is; we do not know where it is not."

Fine, we have a revelation, but also have some fairly lugubrious superstitions and fantasies. The notion that someone will "go to hell" for having been born in the wrong place and not having correct theology is particularly unattractive. We may have an obligation to preserve Orthodoxy of faith, but that in and of itself is no guarantee of our salvation. And preserving Orthodoxy in a triumphalist manner really does indicate that we may have correct theology, but are without the Gospel that it is based on, that we hold a faith which we have no understanding.

March 23, 2017

One dynamic area of childhood learning that needs to be discussed in detail is the way in which poverty can lower cognitive skills and interfere with learning ability; I would like to focus a bit on this dynamic.

There has been a tendency in some elements of society, notably right wing conservatives, to almost moralise poverty and the lower levels of cognitive and learning ability in people who grow up in poverty and suffering from malnutrition. While this is particularly true in America, such destructive attitudes exist elsewhere.

Poverty begets poverty. Low income families, those confined to minimum wage incomes and other forms of poverty, tend to remain at poverty levels for some generations. During the dark era of the Eugenics theory, it was posited that families that lived below or near the poverty level were mentally deficient due to some hereditary abnormality. The so-called "prosperity gospel" of some religious sects transferred this eugenics theory into a morality theory. The basic idea was that people lived in poverty because they merited God's disfavour. The theories are reflected in efforts by certain political wings striving to terminate school nutrition programmes that provide for what is often the only nutritious meal that poor children receive each day for the five days a week that they are in school. Even this does nothing to help create a successful learning environment for preschool children who live at or near the poverty level. In some nations, including in North America, this affects millions of children.

March 06, 2017

Truly the Holy Spirit has gathered us here today we may worship and praise our Lord Jesus Christ and remember the Gospel that He has given to us, and the freedom that He bestowed upon us. Why does the apostle in this epistle today tell us that Christ has torn down the middle wall that separated us and abolished the ordinances and the laws of commandments that were set before us, yet Christ said "I did not come to abolish the law that everything would be fulfilled" and that "not one jot or one tittle of the law would pass away until all things were fulfilled." The answer is that all things are fulfilled in our Lord Jesus Christ, that the fulfilment of the law is righteousness not punishment. Our Lord God and Saviour Jesus Christ has fulfilled all righteousness for us, on our behalf. He has also told us the actual meaning of the law and given us the very foundation stone the very hinge upon which the law and the prophets would rotate: love of God with all of our being and love of neighbour as our self. This is all the law and the prophets, and this is what the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ has given us: We have been liberated from the bondage of law and set free into the glorious freedom of divine grace, for we have been given grace in place of law.

There has been a regrettable tendency to falsely and naively assume the right wing of the Enlightenment project (with its excessive focus on the empirical, rationalistic, scientistic and secular ideology) defines the modern ethos. Such an approach negates the ongoing interest in spirituality, religion and a contemplative way of knowing and being that have played a significant role in the romantic and humanist commitments of the Enlightenment. The sheer beauty and bounty of Mystical Landscapes: From Vincent van Gogh to Emily Carr is the way this visual and literary text amply illustrates how many of the finest artists of the 19th and 20th centuries expressed their spiritual longings on canvass as they drew inspiration and deeper insight from the vast landscape of Nature.

The intricate and delicate interplay in this packed tome between multiple essays and classical paintings drawn, mostly, from the European and North American context make for a comprehensive read and visual tour. The fact that Evelyn Underhill is often cited as a guiding visionary of the mystical grounds Mystical Landscapes in a solid and sustained manner. The equally important fact that the paintings included in the text were housed at the Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO) from late autumn 2016 into the early months of 2017 make this collection an unusual and rare coup of sorts for the AGO.

The wide ranging nature of the topics included in the essays, the depth explored, at both a theoretical and applied level and the constant return to the actual paintings makes Mystical Landscapes an evocative and illuminating read---the sheer synthesis is amply admirable. It might have been valuable, by way of conclusion, to draw in more of the Canadian mountain painters beyond the Group of Seven and Emily Carr (such as Peter/Catherine Whyte---Whyte Museum in Baff) and ponder how Underhill’s journey from her earlier Mysticism (1911) to her more mature Worship (1936) might redefine the relationship between mysticism and landscapes, spirituality and nature but these are minor quibbles.

There can be no doubt that Mystical Landscapes: From Vincent van Gogh to Emily Carr is a pioneering book of the highest quality and, as such, presents, through the eyes and souls of artists and writers, a more nuanced and balanced notion and understanding of the modern enlightenment ethos. Do meditatively read and inwardly digest this beauty---soul, mind and imagination will never be the same.

February 12, 2017

December 31, 2016

Faith in Christ pertains to the inner content of the life of Christ. It is not just a collection of religious ideologies and moralisms which ignore Christ and His message in order to return to bondage to the law, as if we were without Grace.

It is said by the Saviour that "not one jot or tittle of the law shall pass away until all things be fulfilled." How is it that anyone (even Orthodox clergy) turn to this saying, yet never, ever pay heed to the prayer we say at the Proskomedia, just after the prayer before the Amvon, and before the final blessing? It begins with the theological statement, "Thou who art Thyself the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets ..."

If Christ Jesus did not "fulfill all things," what did He accomplish?

Of course, if you believe in the 'Atonement' heresy--that Christ was tortured to death to satisfy the bloodlust of a cruel and unforgiving deity, and died to save us from God--then you might not realize that Christ did indeed, fulfill all things so that every jot and tittle of the law may pass away, so that the "manuscript that was against us is torn up," as Paul says, and the "middle wall" (Eph. 2:14) is broken down.

December 19, 2016

Editor’s note: While many believers celebrate the birth of Christ on Christmas day, millions of others extend the celebration of the Incarnation through what they call ‘The Feast of the Nativity’ well into January. In so doing, they think of the Incarnation as encompassing, not only the birth of Christ, but his whole life as God-made-human.

These are the days of the Nativity of our Lord God and Savior, the Incarnation of the living God, the Incarnation of co-suffering Love. The Sunday after the feast, the Gospel story of Herod and the Magi always holds a great revelation for us.

I was asked recently asked online, “Does evidence disprove religion?” Perhaps it doesn't disprove it so much as it exposes it. Remember, we always try to caution that religion and faith are not the same things.

Herod, you know, was a genuine believer. He was very strict about keeping the kosher laws and the other laws of his religion. Even Caesar makes note of the fact that when Herod would come to Rome—as he had to periodically to promise his fealty to the Emperor—he always refused to eat any kind of pork. And he was very careful about the kosher laws. So we could say he was a religious person.

Of course, he also had several wives and he even killed a few of them. He had numerous children both in and out of wedlock. Yet he was very religious! But this doesn't mean he had any faith.

So when the Magi came and told Herod, “Look, the prophecies of your religion are being fulfilled and we have come to venerate the one who has been born according to the word of the holy prophets,” Herod believed. He knew the word of the holy prophets. Yes, he was very religious. He knew and he could consult exactly where the Messiah was to be born. But he understood that the Messiah was to be a military ruler, a military king who would take over the land of Israel and rule it and make it great again.

June 18, 2016

Some have asked me to explain "moral grief," looking at the Holy Fathers.

The best example of Moral Grief is Christ's prayer in Gethsemane just before his betrayal. As the fathers tell us, Christ had no fear of death. He certainly knew who He is. What then, was the "chalice" that He suffered from so greatly and wished to have it removed?

He was referring to His grief over the conditions and bondage of humanity. As the great Russian father, Antony Khrapovitsky says, "Christ suffered more greatly from His moral grief for humanity than He suffered physically on the cross."

Christ expressed no outrage over mankind's sins, which He had come to bear away. Even when critiquing the self-righteous, He was sharp and stern, but without outrage. With the woman taken in adultery, we do not see any moral outraged in Christ, rather, being concerned for her healing and salvation, He demonstrates a moral grief toward her accusers who were, despite of their own moral outrage, were immoral and full of sin themselves.

Moral grief never seeks the punishment or degradation of another, but feels grief over their bondage and inner human suffering. Moral outrage wallows in the desire for punishment, and rages against the other rather than feeling a deep sense of humble grief over their condition. I hope this will explain to some degree.

St Antony Khrapovitsky once wrote:

“In the garden of Gethsemane the Lord demonstrated the ultimate degree of co-suffering with the sins of every person, when He began to be oppressed by them to such a degree that He asked the heavenly Father to deliver Him from the agony. 'And was heard because of His reverence" as the apostle says (Heb.5:7), as an angel appeared and strengthened Him.'

"... How can I benefit from the Saviour's grief over people's sins, in the way that a corrupted person's soul is filled by a friend's co-suffering love? Only if I am convinced of the certainty that I too, I personally, as an individual, was and am encompassed in the heart of Christ Who grieves over my sins. Only when I am aware that He beholds me, stretches out His supporting hand toward me and encompasses me with His co-suffering love: only then is He my Saviour, pouring new moral strength into me, He "Who teaches my hands for war" (Ps. 17:34) against evil.

"This is possible only when He is not foreign to me, not a historical example of virtue, but a part of my being or, more correctly, when I am a part of His being, a participant of the Divine nature, as Apostle Peter says (Pt.1:4).T

PATRISTIC REFERENCES: CHRIST WAS NOT GRIEVED IN GETHSEMANE ABOUT HIS OWN SUFFERING AND CRUCIFIXION:

St Hilary of Poitlers devotes several paragraphs to refuting the idea that Christ felt fear in Gethsemane. He says that Christ's words, “My soul is sorrowful unto death” cannot mean that He was sorrowful because of His own impending death. He was sorrowful unto death in that He sorrowed so greatly over fallen humanity that He came unto death over it. “So far from His sadness being caused by death, it was removed by it.”

Concerning the words, “Let this cup pass from Me,” St Hilary says,

For this prayer is immediately followed by the words, ‘and He came to His disciples and found them sleeping, and said to Peter; could you not watch one hour with Me?...the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh Is weak....' Is the cause of this sadness and this prayer any longer in doubt?...it is not, therefore, for Himself that He is sorrowful and prays, but for those whom He exhorts.

The saint points out that Christ had no need to fear His passion and death, but that even those who were committed to Him would so fear it that at first, on account of it, they would flee and fear to confess Him, and that Christ was sorrowful over this. The whole passage is well worth reading. (See On the Trinity, Book 10:30—40).

See also:

St John Chrysostom, Against the Marcionites and Maniceans

St Cyril of Alexandria, On Luke, Sermon 146, 147

St Ambrose of Milan, On Luke, Book 10:56—62

Both St Cyril and St Ambrose directly confirm Metropolitan Antony's interpretation of the cause and significance of Christ's agony in Gethsemane, and the “cup” which He asked to have removed from Him.

May 21, 2016

I want to repeat some things that I have said before because of some current political circumstances both in secular politics and within the Church: True morality consists far more in how well we care for others than in the external behaviour we demand of others. This why moralism is truly immoral and, moreover, moralism is the last refuge of the pervert.

What is true cannot be a heresy and what is false cannot be sound doctrine. We must stop telling lies as if we were doing so to defend doctrine. We cannot demand of educated people that they must choose between God and truth, but that they cannot have both. Nevertheless, this is being done, and it is not only immoral, but it is feeding atheism far more than any militant atheist could ever hope to.

Fear cannot produce sincere repentance, but only trigger a survival instinct which produces a false formula of repentance. Such repentance is not about being sorry for sins, but about regretting that you cannot get away with them. Only love can produce a true, heartfelt repentance.

Moral outrage is a form of public confession; we hate most in others what we fear most in ourselves.

Orthodoxy of the mind is merely an intellectual exercise. Until one attains to Orthodoxy of the heart, one is still an alien to the faith. This is why the prayer of the heart directs us to bring the mind into the heart.

With some sort of power, you can brutalise and bully people into what you consider correct external behaviour according to one or another "moral code," but like the law of the Old Testament, this cannot save anyone, it cannot serve for the transformation of the inner person.

Hypocrisy is among the greatest acts of immorality and sin. It is 100 times worse when the hypocrite is a hierarch or priest. It not only destroys the soul of the hypocrite but forms a stumbling block to others who seeking to follow Christ.

March 05, 2016

If one were to carefully study the several ways in which Christ Himself turned much of the Old Testament on its head, one might end up being very surprised. The woman taken in adultery was forgiven, not stoned. The Sabbath was not kept in order to demonstrate that the “Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath." He exalted and healed those who were not Jews, but "sinners" from among the nations. The Old Testament forbids the deformed, maimed and unclean to enter the temple; Christ fellowshipped with them and healed them. The Prophets rebuked the wealthy and Israel in general for ignoring the plight of the poor, the widow and the orphan; Christ made caring for them a prerequisite for entering the heavenly kingdom. Even the kosher food laws were overturned when the scroll was unrolled before Peter on the rooftop.

Perhaps, then, Christians should be wary of trying to reinstitute even elements of the Old Testament Law. Christ said that no point of the Law would pass away until all things were fulfilled (Matt. 5:17-18), although He had already overturned major elements of it. But when He proclaimed "It is Finished," all things were fulfilled and, as our beloved father Paul tells us, the Law was abolished (Eph. 2:14-15). Moreover, "if there be established a new priesthood, there is of necessity a New Covenant" (Heb. 7:12). And if a new covenant, then what "Law"? For, “in that he says, `A new covenant,’ he has made the first old. Now that which decays and grows old is ready to vanish away” (Heb. 8:13). If the Law is replaced by Grace (the law could neither sanctify nor perfect, nor could it transform the inner person, nor could it save anyone), and by a new law of Love, then why should any dog return to its own vomit when a banquet of love and grace has been set before it? If we seek to reinstitute the law of the Old Covenant, then by that do we not renounce the New Covenant, and with it the High Priest by Whom it is established in His own precious blood? Should those who wish now to reinstitute even one jot or tittle of the Old Law, thus re-establishing the Covenant that has passed away, not rather tremble and repent for having renounced the blood of Christ which established a New Covenant and a priesthood after the order of Melchizedek, abolishing the priesthood after the order of Aaron? Can one embrace one jot or tittle of that Law without renouncing the Grace which replaced it?

January 13, 2016

Love is the glue that holds the universe together. This is reflected in our hymnology, "Christ the word, the wisdom and the power of God that creates and sustains all things." We can assimilate such a concept as the basis of our spiritual life, and rise above the fundamentalist and literalist understanding of Scripture.
The alternative is to engage in monumental flights of the most irrational fantasy in vain attempts to reconcile the concepts of God revealed in Christ Jesus with a literalist understanding that God Himself actually commanded the ancient Hebrews to commit the most unspeakable acts of war crimes and crimes against humanity ever recorded in history. In our own eon, those same acts would have landed their perpetrators, not in the Hague, but in Nuremburg. Yet those same literalists will ascert that God is loving, caring for mankind, just and willing to sacrifice His own son for love of mankind. And they do this in the vain hope that more civilised generations will accept their senseless attempts to justify those monstrous actions. Nor can they explain why the miracles of modern medicine that heal and save the lives of millions of people outstrip the notion of the few, if any at all, actual healings take place through their ministrations. Perhaps this is why medicine in a very modern sense, was a ministry of the Orthodox Church from the time of Apostle Paul until the fall of the Byzantine Empire, why in the Orthodox world, medicine was hospital based, the unmercinary physicians are among the most venerated of saints, and the foundations of Arab medcine were laid in Jundeshapur by Nestorian Christians exiled from the Byzantine Empire.
The perverse notion of linking the concept of justice to "punishment," rather than its original concept of putting in balance and setting matters aright, is inexcusable. God is love, and therefore the balance and adhesive of the universe is love. There is no other meaning to life than to love and be loved, and the highest manifestation of that is co-suffering love, the cosudffering love of God with humanity in Christ Jesus. But at every level, sincere love, unselfish love, is the essence of all meaning to life.

December 26, 2015

This year, now drawing to an end, must surely remind of us of the horrors mankind can visit upon humanity. The disasters we create are worse than the natural disasters that we often fear more. As we carry the tragedies of this year forward into the new year with unresolved wars, incalculable suffering both of refugees and of those unable to flee from the strife and brutality of war zones, it might be well to consider how much of the horror arises from sectarianism and other forms of tribalism. While some would like to deny the degree to which the suffering, genocides and savage slaughters are so often religion-based, this reality is ultimately undeniable. Religion which has lost its way and its bases degrades into a system of primitive tribalism and political ideologies. It is tragic that, with all the sectarian and religious-based horror in our world, so many concern themselves with questions of much less significance and with a form of unrealistic, narrow-minded and often brutal moralisms, the meaning of which vanish in the face of the greater tragedies of mankind. Yet, our tribalism leads us to focus on the less significant, the desire to force others to believe and act as our branch of our religion thinks proper, while offering no deeper consideration to the actual, profound tragedies that religious fundamentalism daily creates around the world.